Display options
Cite
Hernández-González A, González-Bertolín B, Urrea L, et al. Multiple-bead assay for the differential serodiagnosis of neglected human cestodiases: Neurocysticercosis and cystic echinococcosis. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2022;16(1):e0010109doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0010109.
Hernández-González, A., González-Bertolín, B., Urrea, L., Fleury, A., Ferrer, E., Siles-Lucas, M., Tamarozzi, F., & Perteguer, M. J. (2022). Multiple-bead assay for the differential serodiagnosis of neglected human cestodiases: Neurocysticercosis and cystic echinococcosis. PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 16(1), e0010109. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0010109
Hernández-González, Ana, et al. "Multiple-bead assay for the differential serodiagnosis of neglected human cestodiases: Neurocysticercosis and cystic echinococcosis." PLoS neglected tropical diseases vol. 16,1 (2022): e0010109. doi: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0010109
Hernández-González A, González-Bertolín B, Urrea L, Fleury A, Ferrer E, Siles-Lucas M, Tamarozzi F, Perteguer MJ. Multiple-bead assay for the differential serodiagnosis of neglected human cestodiases: Neurocysticercosis and cystic echinococcosis. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2022 Jan 14;16(1):e0010109. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0010109. eCollection 2022 Jan. PMID: 35030166; PMCID: PMC8759687.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2022 Jan 14;16(1):e0010109. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0010109. eCollection 2022 Jan.

Multiple-bead assay for the differential serodiagnosis of neglected human cestodiases: Neurocysticercosis and cystic echinococcosis.

PLoS neglected tropical diseases

Ana Hernández-González, Belén González-Bertolín, Laura Urrea, Agnes Fleury, Elizabeth Ferrer, Mar Siles-Lucas, Francesca Tamarozzi, Maria J Perteguer

Affiliations

  1. Laboratorio de Helmintos, Centro Nacional de Microbiología (CNM), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Majadahonda, Madrid, Spain.
  2. Departamento de Microbiología y Parasitología, Facultad de Farmacia, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Madrid, Spain.
  3. Instituto de Investigaciones Biomédicas, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM); México/Instituto Nacional de Neurología and Neurocirugía, Mexico City, Mexico.
  4. Instituto de Investigaciones Biomédicas "Dr. Francisco J. Triana Alonso" (BIOMED), Departamento de Parasitología, Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, Universidad de Carabobo Sede Aragua, Maracay, estado Aragua, Venezuela.
  5. Instituto de Recursos Naturales and Agrobiología de Salamanca, Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (IRNASA-CSIC), Salamanca, Spain.
  6. Department of Infectious-Tropical Diseases and Microbiology, IRCCS Sacro Cuore Don Calabria Hospital, Negrar, Verona, Italy.

PMID: 35030166 PMCID: PMC8759687 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0010109

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Neurocysticercosis (NCC), and cystic echinococcosis (CE) are two neglected diseases caused by cestodes, co-endemic in many areas of the world. Imaging studies and serological tests are used in the diagnosis of both parasitic diseases, but cross-reactions may confound the results of the latter. The novel multiplex bead-based assay with recombinant antigens has been reported to increases the diagnostic accuracy of serological techniques.

METHODOLOGY: We set-up an immunoassay based on the multiplex bead-based platform (MBA), using the rT24H (against Cysticercus cellulosae, causing cysticercosis) and r2B2t (against Echinococcus granulosus sensu lato, causing CE) recombinant antigens, for simultaneous and differential diagnosis of these infections. The antigens were tested on 356 sera from 151 patients with CE, 126 patients with NCC, and 79 individuals negative for both diseases. Specificity was calculated including sera from healthy donors, other neurological diseases and the respective NCC or CE sera counterpart. The diagnostic accuracy of this assay was compared with two commercial ELISA tests, Novalisa and Ridascreen, widely used in the routine diagnosis of cysticercosis and CE, respectively.

MAIN FINDINGS: For the diagnosis of NCC, sensitivity ranged from 57.94-63.49% for the rT24H-MBA, and 40.48-46.03% for Novalisa ELISA depending on exclusion or inclusion of sera having equivocal results on ELISA from the analysis; specificities ranged from 90.87-91.30% and 70.43-76.96%, respectively. AUC values of the ROC curve were 0.783 (rT24H) and 0.619 (Novalisa) (p-value < 0.001). For the diagnosis of CE, the sensitivity of the r2B2t-MBA ranged from 68.87-69.77% and of Ridascreen ELISA from 50.00-57.62%; specificities from 92.47-92.68% and from 74.15-80.98%, respectively. AUC values were 0.717 and 0.760, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Overall, the recombinant antigens tested with the bead-based technology showed better diagnostic accuracy than the commercial assays, particularly for the diagnosis of NCC. The possibility of testing the same serum sample simultaneously for the presence of antibodies against both antigens is an added value particularly in seroprevalence studies for cysticercosis linked to control programs in endemic areas where these two parasites coexist.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

References

  1. World J Hepatol. 2014 May 27;6(5):293-305 - PubMed
  2. Mol Biochem Parasitol. 2007 Mar;152(1):90-100 - PubMed
  3. Trop Med Int Health. 2020 May;25(5):566-578 - PubMed
  4. Parasit Vectors. 2016 Jan 04;9:1 - PubMed
  5. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2015 Oct 20;9(10):e0004168 - PubMed
  6. Adv Parasitol. 2021;112:133-217 - PubMed
  7. J Clin Microbiol. 2000 Oct;38(10):3718-21 - PubMed
  8. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2018 May;98(5):1408-1412 - PubMed
  9. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2014 Jan;90(1):75-9 - PubMed
  10. J Neurol Sci. 2017 Jan 15;372:202-210 - PubMed
  11. Trop Med Int Health. 2018 Jan;23(1):101-105 - PubMed
  12. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2021 Apr 28;15(4):e0009370 - PubMed
  13. Parasit Vectors. 2017 Jan 3;10(1):1 - PubMed
  14. J Clin Microbiol. 2018 Aug 27;56(9): - PubMed
  15. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2020 Nov 30;14(11):e0008892 - PubMed
  16. Biometrics. 1988 Sep;44(3):837-45 - PubMed
  17. Ann Neurol. 2016 Sep;80(3):434-42 - PubMed
  18. Adv Parasitol. 2017;96:159-257 - PubMed
  19. Trends Parasitol. 2009 Apr;25(4):164-70 - PubMed
  20. World J Gastroenterol. 2012 Apr 7;18(13):1425-37 - PubMed
  21. Parasit Vectors. 2018 Oct 30;11(1):569 - PubMed
  22. J Neurol Sci. 2018 Jul 15;390:75-76 - PubMed
  23. Acta Trop. 2006 Apr;98(1):74-86 - PubMed
  24. Zoonoses Public Health. 2019 Dec;66(8):889-899 - PubMed
  25. Int J Parasitol. 2012 Aug;42(9):797-800 - PubMed
  26. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2019 Jul 10;13(7):e0007501 - PubMed
  27. Ultrasound Int Open. 2018 Sep;4(3):E70-E78 - PubMed
  28. Clin Chem. 2005 Oct;51(10):1845-53 - PubMed
  29. J Immunol Methods. 2016 Aug;435:17-26 - PubMed
  30. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2014 Jul 31;8(7):e3040 - PubMed
  31. Acta Trop. 2003 Dec;89(1):73-84 - PubMed
  32. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2012;6(7):e1714 - PubMed
  33. J Clin Microbiol. 2014 May;52(5):1429-34 - PubMed
  34. Rofo. 2018 Feb;190(2):121-133 - PubMed
  35. Acta Trop. 2010 Apr;114(1):1-16 - PubMed
  36. Malar J. 2019 Jan 3;18(1):1 - PubMed
  37. Mol Biochem Parasitol. 2006 May;147(1):109-17 - PubMed
  38. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2018 Sep 6;12(9):e0006741 - PubMed
  39. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2016 Mar;94(3):615-25 - PubMed
  40. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2019 Feb 13;32(2): - PubMed
  41. Gates Open Res. 2019 Sep 26;3:1546 - PubMed
  42. Continuum (Minneap Minn). 2018 Oct;24(5, Neuroinfectious Disease):1489-1511 - PubMed

Publication Types